You have your finger in the dyke and the leak is getting bigger. Hybrids are here to stay and every day more and more are being put into production which is why Renault wanted them in F1 and the sports car side of racing has gone that way. All the maths in the world will not change that.

Somehow a paper napkin comparison of 2015 vs. 1970's F1 fuel consumption is supposed to be the definitive word on hybrid technology in road cars?

A few things that i suspect are true...

1. A case can be made that "current" hybrid technology in road cars may NOT save you money in the long term.
2. People typically do not buy hybrid road cars purely to save money on gas.
3. Road car hybrids likely has little to do with McLaren/Honda's problems.
4. Current rules makes it hard to guarantee success with 2014+ F1 PSUs.

On topic...

I am both a McLaren and Honda fan, so this entire situation suck. I am doubtful they can make this a successful season. What really puzzles me is that they are so far off. I know that there is no substitute for testing in a real F1 car and that they can't simulate everything in test rigs or mules. But given how hard Renault and Ferrari struggled last year (and that Honda watched that from the sidelines), I would have thought they would have taken this a bit more seriously. I would expect problems, but not what appears to be some type of fundamental problem that they are apparently not able to resolve after a handful of attempts. Mercedes was able to make it work in 2014 so this is not mission impossible.

That is my glass half empty thoughts. My half full thoughts is that they maybe are on the edge of a really good PSU and that they decided to REALLY push the envelope, know it is fragile and that they just now need to make it reliable. But I am having a really hard time selling myself on that version of things.

It will be really interesting to see what if any improvements happen with McLaren/Honda over the next few races.

Richard

__________________
Money can't buy happiness, but somehow it's more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than a Kia.

That is my glass half empty thoughts. My half full thoughts is that they maybe are on the edge of a really good PSU and that they decided to REALLY push the envelope, know it is fragile and that they just now need to make it reliable. But I am having a really hard time selling myself on that version of things.

It will be really interesting to see what if any improvements happen with McLaren/Honda over the next few races.

Richard

Richard, having read the quite long article a few weeks ago about the all new front-engined Nissan LMP1, what you describe above would appear to be the avenue down which Nissan are travelling. They have produced a power-unit that, if they can iron out the bugs, may well be a world beater, and in some respects they are really going out on a limb. I hope that it works for them.

Taking the above into consideration, what you suggest could very well be the course of action that Honda have taken as well. I also wish them well in their endeavours.

1. A case can be made that "current" hybrid technology in road cars may NOT save you money in the long term.

Yes, you can make this case if you setup a nice strawman argument, like comparing the savings resulting from driving a $50K hybrid Lexus or Infiniti versus driving a $20K Toyota Corolla. However, personally I have done a few back of napkin calculations involving Toyota Prius, arguably the best bang for buck hybrid car out there, and based on the USA car prices, yes you can break even and even save some money if you compare buying a new Prius vs a similarly equipped Honda Accord after you drive 80,000 miles or so. In the USA, where commute distances can be long, some people can cover 80,000 miles in 3-4 years, so a Prius could make sense for them, although personally I'd still opt for a USDM Accord, because it's a bigger, classier, more refined car. Of course, my own argument in favor of Prius will fall apart if you drive say 10,000 miles a year or less or if you realize you could just buy a Corolla.. If you drive under 10,000 miles a year, a Prius makes no sense whatsoever at the current gas prices in the USA. Also, if you're so stingy, why not just drive a Yaris?

Anyways, in my opinion, Prius is not too far away from beating a Corolla in the cost-to-benefits department. If MSRPs of ALL trims of Prius were 2-3grand cheaper, then Prius would beat even Corolla in the cost-to-benefit department, which is really impressive. Prius is basically almost there. Prius is an econobox, but it's a much nicer car than Corolla. For one, the drivetrain has brilliant performance in the throttle response department up to the speed of 50mph or so, which makes Prius a nice zippy suburban commuter car, and the turn circle is quiet small making it easy to park the car in tight spaces.

You also have to recall the government regulations. Just like the European public policy had pushed people to buy more diesel cars, so does the American EPA strategy push people to buy more and more hybrid cars. In a few years, a consumer will have no choice but have to cross shop between a hybrid and non-hybrid car because of EPA corporate fleet fuel economy standards.

So is the bottom line then that it shouldn't matter how much the engine manus spend on their F1 programs because they will recoup those cost through the sale of their road cars?

__________________
What shall we use to fill the empty spaces, where waves of hunger roar?
Shall we set out across the sea of faces in search of more and more applause?
Shall we buy a new guitar? Shall we drive a more powerful car?

Yes, you can make this case .................EPA corporate fleet fuel economy standards.

Hi JacobP have you included the cost of maintaining the 80 000 mile Prius compared to an 80 000 mile Corolla? The Honda you are comparing to these two is a significantly nicer car!

In my experience something that is not there is much cheaper to maintain than all the KERS generators, electronics, batteries and motors of the hybrids. The petrol engine in the hybrids also perversely seems to take more strain than the one that is pushing the heavier hybrid around.
Fuel is not the only cost of running a car, spares, maintenance and servicing contribute significantly to the cost.

Would also like to run the next 80 000 - 160 000 miles of Prius/Hybrid v Corolla, Hyundai, VW or Honda.

P.S. Richard, the manus were the ones crowing about the road relevance of their hybrid power plants in F1.
Seems like great expense for little economy, wonder how a 250 kg weight saving with a 1.6 litre turbo only, would compare to the current cars in racing terms? No contest!

P.S. Richard, the manus were the ones crowing about the road relevance of their hybrid power plants in F1.
Seems like great expense for little economy, wonder how a 250 kg weight saving with a 1.6 litre turbo only, would compare to the current cars in racing terms? No contest!

I agree with what you are saying, but I don't think it is that simple. For road cars, manufactures are using various methods to make "efficient" cars. I don't want to be drawn into the math around if it makes financial sense as that is a can of worm and (IMHO) off topic for this thread. Anyhow, the primary methods used today include direct injection, diesel, small turbos, hybrid and electric.

If your marketing team (notice this is not about engineering) wanted to tout your road relevancy, you look at that list and think...

DI... not sexy enough by itself, but do it anyhow as it helps efficiency and/or power.
Diesel... nobody really wants diesel F1, so that was a non starter.
Turbo... not sexy enough on it's own, been there done that, but still add it to the mix and match to a low displacement engine to cap power.
Hybrid... really the only thing that is new to F1 and maps to what they are doing in road cars, so make it part of the formula. In fact, make it the centerpiece.
Electric... Like diesel, nobody wants a 100% electric F1, so add it into the mix on the hybrid side.

My point is that they are really looking at this from a marketing perspective and then handing it over to the engineers to build. Not the reverse. Marketing and engineering might have different answers to that road relevancy question. And I don't doubt that the engineers didn't relish the challenge even if ultimately the Mercedes solution crushed them all.

Richard

__________________
Money can't buy happiness, but somehow it's more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than a Kia.

Hybrids have arrived in motor sport and it is not negotiable, in fact the next generation of motors for F1 will tip even further away from the IC motor. I don't say that from any knowledge of what will happen as nothing has happened but from the logical sequence of events that got us this far and what is happening in the market place. You would have to be deaf, dumb, blind and stupid to think otherwise. The electric series open wheelers is really starting to attract some very serious sponsors and interest as that is where they see the future, there was one mentioned the other day but I can't recall who it was. Next year they are allowing more power to be used if I understand it all and this will create more interest. The avalanche has started and there is no stopping it, just like the IC motor overcame every other power source its time has come and the industry is actively looking at alternatives.

If I had my way the present system would be thrown and a small block Chev or similar with turbo would be in the back of them. Cheap, cheerful, powerful enough to do the job and any decent mechanic can work on it. BTW I am serious about the motor but wiser heads prevail and we have to spend millions to do the same job endangering the viability of the series.

Back on topic, as for Honda not being up to speed, it beggars belief that they could get into such a mess but there is a factor that I have not seen mentioned. Their design lead time would roughly parallel the introduction of the present motors beginning in 2014 so they may have set in stone some of the design from early last year and decided to stick with their initial design even if they saw what was happening on the track. Just surmising of course but it seems viable.

Back on topic, as for Honda not being up to speed, it beggars belief that they could get into such a mess but there is a factor that I have not seen mentioned. Their design lead time would roughly parallel the introduction of the present motors beginning in 2014 so they may have set in stone some of the design from early last year and decided to stick with their initial design even if they saw what was happening on the track. Just surmising of course but it seems viable.

Go easy on the horse, it may get up and surprise us yet. An LS series V8 with turbo will get 1000hp easy and you only need a MOTEC to run it. Can I have the change out of $24 million please, I will send my bank details.

Go easy on the horse, it may get up and surprise us yet. An LS series V8 with turbo will get 1000hp easy and you only need a MOTEC to run it. Can I have the change out of $24 million please, I will send my bank details.

The Honda predicament reminds me of the Footwork Arrows-Porsche disaster of 1991.

Based on the fabulous performance of the previous TAG badged Porsche motor
everyone in the paddock wanted to get their hands on the German companies new 3512 V12 engine.

It proved to be an absolute dog of a motor, resulting in Porsche limping away from F1 never to return again.Is Honda going to follow the same path..........?

No, I don't think Honda will walk away licking their wounds, I am sure that the combined efforts of Honda & McLaren will (eventually) sort out this mess and make it to the front of the grid where they both belong.
How long (and how much money) this will take however is something that I cannot predict!

Hi JacobP have you included the cost of maintaining the 80 000 mile Prius compared to an 80 000 mile Corolla?

Yes, Prius is probably more expensive to maintain than a Corolla, but a decade and a half of experience now show that Prius has an incredible reliability record. The stories of the expensive Prius battery replacements are actually overblown. It's far more likely that an automatic transmission in a conventional car will fail before you have to replace the Prius batteries. Most people drive the Prius up to impressive six figure mile mileages without doing anything except changing fluids. My relatives have an 80,000 mile Prius, and this was indeed their experience so far.